[Jake]

by many you mean 2 9mms and a .22?

Wow, what an arsenal.

12gauge+semi auto SKS > 2 9mms and a .22



I guess I'm going to war against the sonic down the street soon. Wish me luck guys.



Here's the gun control laws we need.
-no armor piercing rounds
-no (current) military hardware
-no high explosives
-no powerful IEDs
-etc


basically nothing you could take out a mall with.

[©allum]

And licencing of firearms, as in needing to pass a test, background check and a mental health test to get a gun.

But I don't really think that passing these sorts of laws in the US will stop much, as guns are already available quite freely.

[Rohtaren]

good idea.

[Jake]

Yeah... but knowing the Govt... we are going to screw up the tests. Horribly.
Good idea though.



Anybody remember Drivers Ed.? *cringe*

[Atilla]

Maybe if they made getting a gun as annoying as getting a driver's license there'd be less people interested.

[Nuu™™]

This incident was in no way preventable. This guy would have gone on a shooting rampage regardless of anti-videogaming laws, gun control or anything.

Again, this was not something that can be effectively prevented by passing laws. Any such laws would only destroy more of our freedoms, and in no way save us from these mad people.

So, you are saying that even if he didn't have a gun, he still would have gone on a shooting rampage? How? The last time we had a 'shooting' in this country was when some guy somehow managed to get hold of a crossbow in Queensland and attempted to murder two people with it. He failed, of course, because he was using a crossbow ffs, but if he could have easily bought a gun it wouldn't be an attempted murder.

In America, you can't make owning guns illegal. It's possible to regulate the distribution and registraton of guns, but you can't deny anyone the right to own a gun (without due process). As such, there are lots of guns out there. There are also a lot of guns out there that have fallen through the cracks in the system and are illegally owned and unregistered. The penalties for illegally possessing a firearm are inferior to the penalties for murder (with the exception of automatic weapons), thus someone who is going to kill a person will worry moreso about the murder charge than the possession charge.

I actually did a bit of research for this response, and discovered that this 'right' to own a gun is as follows:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Now, it does say 'the right of the People to keep and bear arms', but not necessarily firearms, or firearms which can be concealed, or that such firearms can be freely bought and sold, and that people can just walk around bearing them even though there is no immediate threat to the 'security of [the] free State'. Also, it does not mention the security of oneself from spree killers. It also contradicts itself to a point, stating that it should be a well regulated militia who bear arms, and then the People in general. In a nutshell: The right to carry a handgun around in your pocket simply doesn't exist.

As for the amount of guns circulating in America, there isn't much you can do about that. It is the fault of the government which allows such industry.

Alternatively, we can go with a system where guns are 100% illegal, period. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think many European countries and Austrilia have such laws.

Gladly. In New South Wales at least, handguns or guns which can otherwise be concealed art 100% illegal, as you say. Imports of such guns need to come into the country by illegal means. Larger guns which cannot be concealed are considered to be necessary on farms and necessary to maintain the anarchy and aboriginal genocide in Northern Queensland, particularly Palm Island. I can't remember actually ever seeing a gun in real life because of such laws.

There are some great benefits and some nasty consequences of this. While shootings are drastically reduced, when one does occur, people must rely on authorities to protect themselves. This isn't always plausible.

Note the fact that in the Virginia massacre no one else actually shot the spree killer, even though people were allowed to bear and keep a gun. Also, there are ways of protecting yourself other than shooting people.

Also, having a country full of gun-owning citizens keeps would-be facist politicians in their place. For instance, if Bush were to try and stay in office past the expiration of his term in '08, I can guarentee to you he'd be assassinated.

So if we had more guns Pauline Hansen might be assassinated? Perhaps you are on to something there...

Guns keep power in the hands of the people.

Have you ever heard of the Carnation Revolution? No, I didn't think so. It occured on the 25th of April 1974 where the Portuguese citizens rallied on the streets of Lisbon armed not with guns, as the soldiers who had been sent in by Estado Novo, the integralist government at the time were, but with red carnations. The revolutionaries were successful, of course, but had they been armed with guns the soldiers may have perhaps been less willing to side with the citizens, as they did.

You say that life is more important than freedom. In America, we tend to believe the opposite. We value freedom so much, many of us are willing to die for it. Freedom more than anything is the foundation of our lives. If any freedom is to be taken away, there needs to be a pretty damn good reason for it.

If Americans really believed that, Americans wouldn't enslave people and oppress other nations.

[©allum]

America doesn't enslave and oppress, America liberates.

[Nuu™™]

America doesn't enslave and oppress, America liberates.

Liberates them from being forced to live a non-American-influenced life. God bless.

[Res]

[San Dani L]

And licencing of firearms, as in needing to pass a test, background check and a mental health test to get a gun.

But I don't really think that passing these sorts of laws in the US will stop much, as guns are already available quite freely.

In finland you need to pass a test to get a licence to carry weapons just like you need a licence to drive a car.

[Neraphym]

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Actually, if you'd really like to misinterprit this amendment, you could say it guarantees us the right to wear sleeveless shirts. The purpose of this Amendment is perfectly clear. It's to help secure the 'free' in the free state. You can't do that with polearms. Since guns existed and were readily used back when this was written, its clear that it was meant to encompass guns.

And no one had a gun in Virginia Tech because we do have such 100% anti-gun laws the moment you set foot within 100 feet of a school. The poors kids were forced to resort to alternative methods of protecting themselves from the shooter: playing dead while hiding beneath the corpses of their bullet-riddled classmates. There was a shooting a while back on a school (before the 100 foot law) where a teacher ran out to his car, got a gun in his trunk, and stopped the shooter from killing more kids. The 100 foot laws were added as a response to this. Which brings me to my next point.

A lot of Americans are retarded, and a lot aren't. Sadly, it seems only the dumb ones get into office. We have lawyers making scientific decisions, and scientists trying to use rhetoric to convice the lawyers not to. As such, we have a nasty cycle of people doing things without having any knowledge in the subject. We're working on this.

[San Dani L]

A lot of Americans are retarded, and a lot aren't. Sadly, it seems only the dumb ones get into office. We have lawyers making scientific decisions, and scientists trying to use rhetoric to convice the lawyers not to. As such, we have a nasty cycle of people doing things without having any knowledge in the subject. We're working on this.

well if there's 301,541,000 people there has to be a few retarded persons?

[Jake]

A lot of Americans are retarded, and a lot aren't. Sadly, it seems only the dumb ones get into office. We have lawyers making scientific decisions, and scientists trying to use rhetoric to convice the lawyers not to. As such, we have a nasty cycle of people doing things without having any knowledge in the subject. We're working on this.

well if there's 301,541,000 people there has to be a few retarded persons?

I can confidently say that at least 1/3 of america id f***tarded.

Seriously...

[Neraphym]

I agree. Lot's of idiots in this country.

[Zziggywolf5]

Ah, I see that this has become a gun control debate.
So I might as well flame join in.

This incident was in no way preventable. This guy would have gone on a shooting rampage regardless of anti-videogaming laws, gun control or anything.

Again, this was not something that can be effectively prevented by passing laws. Any such laws would only destroy more of our freedoms, and in no way save us from these mad people.

So, you are saying that even if he didn't have a gun, he still would have gone on a shooting rampage? How? The last time we had a 'shooting' in this country was when some guy somehow managed to get hold of a crossbow in Queensland and attempted to murder two people with it. He failed, of course, because he was using a crossbow ffs, but if he could have easily bought a gun it wouldn't be an attempted murder.

On a side note, 3 Iraqi lawmakers died and a few dozen others were wounded in a suicide bombing last week.

And nine Afghans were killed by bombs this morning according to CNN's website.

But that's just a side note, as Americans are better and more important humans than Iraqis and Afghans, apparently.

Woah, an American actually saying something negative about Americans! You see something new every day...

I don't think Alpha was talking about if he didn't have a gun; I think he was referring to preventive measures like gun restrictions. IE: This shooting would have happened because he could have been able to get a hold of a gun anyway. America unfortenatly does have a black market.
Was that necessary? Or do you honestly believe all Americans are pompous and full of {expletive hax0rd by Cspace}?

This incident was in no way preventable. This guy would have gone on a shooting rampage regardless of anti-videogaming laws, gun control or anything.

Again, this was not something that can be effectively prevented by passing laws. Any such laws would only destroy more of our freedoms, and in no way save us from these mad people.

So, you are saying that even if he didn't have a gun, he still would have gone on a shooting rampage? How? The last time we had a 'shooting' in this country was when some guy somehow managed to get hold of a crossbow in Queensland and attempted to murder two people with it. He failed, of course, because he was using a crossbow ffs, but if he could have easily bought a gun it wouldn't be an attempted murder.

In America, you can't make owning guns illegal. It's possible to regulate the distribution and registraton of guns, but you can't deny anyone the right to own a gun (without due process). As such, there are lots of guns out there. There are also a lot of guns out there that have fallen through the cracks in the system and are illegally owned and unregistered. The penalties for illegally possessing a firearm are inferior to the penalties for murder (with the exception of automatic weapons), thus someone who is going to kill a person will worry moreso about the murder charge than the possession charge.

I actually did a bit of research for this response, and discovered that this 'right' to own a gun is as follows:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Now, it does say 'the right of the People to keep and bear arms', but not necessarily firearms, or firearms which can be concealed, or that such firearms can be freely bought and sold, and that people can just walk around bearing them even though there is no immediate threat to the 'security of [the] free State'. Also, it does not mention the security of oneself from spree killers. It also contradicts itself to a point, stating that it should be a well regulated militia who bear arms, and then the People in general. In a nutshell: The right to carry a handgun around in your pocket simply doesn't exist.

As for the amount of guns circulating in America, there isn't much you can do about that. It is the fault of the government which allows such industry.

Ah, interpretation... Perfect for reinforcing opinions and justifying... things.

You say that life is more important than freedom. In America, we tend to believe the opposite. We value freedom so much, many of us are willing to die for it. Freedom more than anything is the foundation of our lives. If any freedom is to be taken away, there needs to be a pretty damn good reason for it.

If Americans really believed that, Americans wouldn't enslave people and oppress other nations.

Enslavement? No, I seriously want to know who.